Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, August 18, 2014 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br />  <br />Page 18 of 33  <br />  <br />The subject property fronts on a long channel and is somewhat disconnected from the lake. The <br />configuration of the subject property along the end of the channel creates a unique situation regarding the <br />view. The neighboring home to the south at 855 Forest Arms Lane is set back further on their property <br />than the subject home and has no lake view. The neighbor to the north faces in a more westerly direction <br />towards the channel rather than over the subject property. In addition there are mature trees separating <br />the subject property from both neighbors which likely screen most of the view of the improvements and <br />the home. Comments have been received from the neighbors in support of the application. <br /> <br />Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance to allow construction of the <br />elevated deck, screen porch, and pergola up to 21 feet ahead of the average lakeshore setback line. <br /> <br />Laura Westrude, Architectural Landscape Design, stated the applicants may like to extend the deck to a <br />maximum of five feet closer to the lake, which would encompass the proposed patio. <br /> <br />Leskinen asked if it would be further than what is being proposed. <br /> <br />Westrude indicated it would not be and would encompass the proposed patio. <br /> <br />Leskinen asked if it is the elevated portion of the deck that is being extended. <br /> <br />Westrude indicated it is. <br /> <br />Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 8:08 p.m. <br /> <br />There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> <br />Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 8:08 p.m. <br /> <br />Curtis displayed a picture of the subject property looking towards the house to the house. Curtis pointed <br />out the location of the proposed deck. <br /> <br />McGrann asked if the additional five feet raises any concerns with Staff. <br /> <br />Curtis stated it does not. Curtis stated it would be a further encroachment to the lake, but based on <br />personal observations of the site, it should not impact the adjacent property owners. <br /> <br />Leskinen stated it does not appear that the adjacent neighbors would be able to see it given the tree line. <br /> <br />Landgraver noted the trees appear to be all deciduous but that typically people are not out on their decks <br />in the wintertime. Landgraver stated based on the orientation of the properties, it should not be very <br />visible to the neighbors. <br /> <br />Curtis stated to her knowledge the windows of the house to the south do not actually face the applicants’ <br />property and are actually located in a garage. <br /> <br />Lemke asked if there were any comments from that neighbor. <br /> <br />Item #01 - PC Agenda - 09/15/2014 <br />Approval of Planning Commission Minutes <br />[Page 18 of 33]